Okes v. Saul
| David Okes |
| Andrew Saul |
| 1:2019cv00796 |
| November 18, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia |
| Omar J Aboulhosn |
| David A Faber |
| Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 12, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 RESPONSE by David Okes to the Court's #6 Order. (Lefler, Derrick) |
Filing 6
ORDER: Counsel is DIRECTED to file with the Court a pleading certifying whether Dr. Kropac is or is not involved in this matter. Should Dr. Kropac be involved, the undersigned will direct that the Clerk rotate this matter to another Magistrate Judge in the District. Therefore, Counsel is ORDERED to file said pleading no later than 12/2/2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge Omar J. Aboulhosn on 11/18/2019. (cc: counsel of record) (mk)
|
| Filing 5 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED as to Andrew Saul, re: #2 Complaint. Summons returnable 60 days. Instructions to Counsel: This is your electronic summons. Please print as many copies of the Summons and Complaint as are necessary to effectuate service under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4. See Proof of Service page of this Summons form for filing a return of service if required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(l). (mk) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER AND NOTICE GRANTING IN FORMA PAUPERIS: It is hereby ORDERED that the #1 application to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. The applicant is hereby permitted to proceed without prepayment of costs of fees or the necessity of giving security therefor. The Clerk of Court shall issue the summons(es); and Plaintiff shall serve the summons(es) and complaint pursuant to Rule 4, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. It is further ORDERED and NOTICED that the recovery, if any, obtained in this action shall be paid to the Clerk of the Court, who shall pay therefrom all unpaid costs taxed against plaintiff and pay the balance to the plaintiff and plaintiffs attorney, if any. Signed by Magistrate Judge Omar J. Aboulhosn on 11/18/2019. (cc: counsel of record) (mk)
|
| Filing 3 STANDING ORDER IN RE: ASSIGNMENT AND REFERRAL OF CIVIL ACTIONS AND MATTERS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGES ENTERED JANUARY 4, 2016. This case is referred to Magistrate Judge Omar J. Aboulhosn for Findings of Fact and Recommendations for disposition. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (klc) |
| CASE assigned to Judge David A. Faber. (klc) |
| Filing 2 COMPLAINT. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Proposed Summons) (arb) |
| Filing 1 APPLICATION by David Okes to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs. (arb) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Okes v. Saul | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Andrew Saul | |
| Represented By: | Nora R. Koch |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: David Okes | |
| Represented By: | Derrick W. Lefler |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
